What if Christians are Wrong?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
281

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Ahhhh yes, traditional marriage, as defined by the “good book”.[/quote]

Great, reductionism. It’s like I’m talking to a fundamentalist now. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2012/06/ridicule-reductionism-ridicule-and-red-herrings.html [/quote]

Hey, I’m just quoting for you what your holy book says. Not my fault that it says the awful shit that it says.

Words mean things, and it says what it says. Christians seem to spend ALOT of time trying to justify and argue away what’s written in the bible.

[/quote]

Great point, “Words mean things.” Then you turn around and get upset that Christians try and make distinctions and put things into context. Strange fellow you are. I think that’s called hypocrisy when you have a double standard.

282

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Ahhhh yes, traditional marriage, as defined by the “good book”.[/quote]

Great, reductionism. It’s like I’m talking to a fundamentalist now. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2012/06/ridicule-reductionism-ridicule-and-red-herrings.html [/quote]

Hey, I’m just quoting for you what your holy book says. Not my fault that it says the awful shit that it says.

Words mean things, and it says what it says. Christians seem to spend ALOT of time trying to justify and argue away what’s written in the bible.

[/quote]

Great point, “Words mean things.” Then you turn around and get upset that Christians try and make distinctions and put things into context. Strange fellow you are. I think that’s called hypocrisy when you have a double standard. [/quote]

No, what most christians are guilty of, is spin, not contextual explanation. This is why your bible has “evolved” over the years with new interpretations and such. What version of the bible do you subscribe to? Isn’t there like 26 versions of it?

And when a christian comes along saying that the bible says what it says, then you’ll denounce them as “fundamentalist”.

LOL…Trying to apologize and spin away the shit in the bible must be what it’s like as a PR person in charge of handling Joe Biden. “No no, what Biden really meant was…”

283

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Ahhhh yes, traditional marriage, as defined by the “good book”.[/quote]Correction Sparky. You need the redeemed new covenant version. Ephesians 5. Caps indicate a quote from the OT as per the NASB translators. [quote]be subject to one another in the fear of Christ. 22-Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23-For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24-But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.
25-Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, 26-so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27-that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. 28-So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; 29-for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, 30-because we are members of His body. 31-FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. 32-This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. 33-Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband. [/quote][/quote]

So, not only one must choose the right flavor of christianity, but one must be reading the correct version of the bible, if one doesn’t want to burn in a lake of fire…for eternity.

LOL…

But seriously, what’s your thoughts on what Deuteronomy instructing a girl to marry her rapist?
[/quote]

And if you actually read the book and not your silly little atheist bloggers who think they know anything about the book, you’d know that’s not what really happened.
Second, I thought you were a moral relativist? So even if they did rape people I thought that cool since they felt like it.
That’s you lot believe right? It’s ok as long as you think it’s ok? So quit whining. The bible isn’t a book for atheist or for selective reading. If you don’t understand it as a whole work you don’t know shit about it. Quit trying to act like you know things you don’t.

284

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Ahhhh yes, traditional marriage, as defined by the “good book”.[/quote]

Great, reductionism. It’s like I’m talking to a fundamentalist now. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2012/06/ridicule-reductionism-ridicule-and-red-herrings.html [/quote]

Hey, I’m just quoting for you what your holy book says. Not my fault that it says the awful shit that it says.

Words mean things, and it says what it says. Christians seem to spend ALOT of time trying to justify and argue away what’s written in the bible.

[/quote]

Great point, “Words mean things.” Then you turn around and get upset that Christians try and make distinctions and put things into context. Strange fellow you are. I think that’s called hypocrisy when you have a double standard. [/quote]

No, what most christians are guilty of, is spin, not contextual explanation. This is why your bible has “evolved” over the years with new interpretations and such. What version of the bible do you subscribe to? Isn’t there like 26 versions of it?

And when a christian comes along saying that the bible says what it says, then you’ll denounce them as “fundamentalist”.

LOL…Trying to apologize and spin away the shit in the bible must be what it’s like as a PR person in charge of handling Joe Biden. “No no, what Biden really meant was…”
[/quote]

What most atheists are guilty of is tortured reasoning and an utter lack of reason and logic…The sad part is they think they have it, but they cannot reason anything to it’s logical end, because their logic fails. It’s all ego in the end.

It continues to amaze me how interested in God atheists are… I sure wish more Christians express the interest you do.

285

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Ahhhh yes, traditional marriage, as defined by the “good book”.[/quote]

Great, reductionism. It’s like I’m talking to a fundamentalist now. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2012/06/ridicule-reductionism-ridicule-and-red-herrings.html [/quote]

Hey, I’m just quoting for you what your holy book says. Not my fault that it says the awful shit that it says.

Words mean things, and it says what it says. Christians seem to spend ALOT of time trying to justify and argue away what’s written in the bible.

[/quote]

Great point, “Words mean things.” Then you turn around and get upset that Christians try and make distinctions and put things into context. Strange fellow you are. I think that’s called hypocrisy when you have a double standard. [/quote]

No, what most christians are guilty of, is spin, not contextual explanation. This is why your bible has “evolved” over the years with new interpretations and such. What version of the bible do you subscribe to? Isn’t there like 26 versions of it?

And when a christian comes along saying that the bible says what it says, then you’ll denounce them as “fundamentalist”.

LOL…Trying to apologize and spin away the shit in the bible must be what it’s like as a PR person in charge of handling Joe Biden. “No no, what Biden really meant was…”
[/quote]

I think it’s hilarious when people who have never read the bible try to claim to know what the bible says! LOL!

Hey I never read ‘War and Peace’ but I know it talks about war!

You should do a book club with the rule that you don’t actually read the books, then talk about the books with authority! That will make you look like a fucking genius!

286

Pat,

You have to admit that since there are so many versions of the bible out there, and so many interpretations of each bible by supposed “experts” that it makes it awfully easy to dismiss the non-literal interpretations out of hand. If 50 well read educated Christian folk have different understandings of the bible (based on intent and time period relevance)I would think that the literal version is the only way to go, unless you feel that picking and choosing the translations that best fits your own personal understanding of the bible and God is what suits you best.
The only problem with that option though is that it makes you just as right and/or wrong as anyone else picking and choosing their favorites.
Of course if you go literally, bad shit is bound to happen since the bible isn’t the cuddliest of books.

287

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Pat,

You have to admit that since there are so many versions of the bible out there, and so many interpretations of each bible by supposed “experts” that it makes it awfully easy to dismiss the non-literal interpretations out of hand. If 50 well read educated Christian folk have different understandings of the bible (based on intent and time period relevance)I would think that the literal version is the only way to go, unless you feel that picking and choosing the translations that best fits your own personal understanding of the bible and God is what suits you best.
The only problem with that option though is that it makes you just as right and/or wrong as anyone else picking and choosing their favorites.
Of course if you go literally, bad shit is bound to happen since the bible isn’t the cuddliest of books.[/quote]The Catholics fall into this trap too. There many translations of the bible which have just about zero impact on my foundational doctrine. Every orthodox protestant denomination calls every other one brother and there are not 50 interpretation of ANYTHING whatsoever. This is really becoming a yawn listening to this stuff about ALLLLLLLLLLL the different views when they simply don’t exist.

288

So are graven images an abomination of god or not?

Last I checked the Vatican has a lot of’em.

289

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Pat,

You have to admit that since there are so many versions of the bible out there, and so many interpretations of each bible by supposed “experts” that it makes it awfully easy to dismiss the non-literal interpretations out of hand. If 50 well read educated Christian folk have different understandings of the bible (based on intent and time period relevance)I would think that the literal version is the only way to go, unless you feel that picking and choosing the translations that best fits your own personal understanding of the bible and God is what suits you best.
The only problem with that option though is that it makes you just as right and/or wrong as anyone else picking and choosing their favorites.
Of course if you go literally, bad shit is bound to happen since the bible isn’t the cuddliest of books.[/quote]The Catholics fall into this trap too. There many translations of the bible which have just about zero impact on my foundational doctrine. Every orthodox protestant denomination calls every other one brother and there are not 50 interpretation of ANYTHING whatsoever. This is really becoming a yawn listening to this stuff about ALLLLLLLLLLL the different views when they simply don’t exist.
[/quote]

tribulus,

that’s good to hear, so maybe you could explain to me why I see the very religious guys on PWI always arguing over what the bible means or how they understand it, is this just a case of a “bad sample”?

290

[quote]bigflamer wrote:<<< But seriously, what’s your thoughts on what Deuteronomy instructing a girl to marry her rapist?[/quote]In the context of Levitical Israel, or actually the world at large of that day, it was an act of provision and restitution to the women and her family and a command of responsibility and restitution from the man. An unheralded arrangement of good in the near east of that day. Not to mention this would not have been the violence you are envisioning with beating and overwhelming force. When marrying the women of a vanquished foe, that was incredible mercy. They may have been raped and killed or left to starve by the gentile nations. The details are there like I’ve been telling you forever. The alternatives for a woman then were much worse. Yes, that is righteous and good.

291

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:<<< But seriously, what’s your thoughts on what Deuteronomy instructing a girl to marry her rapist?[/quote]In the context of Levitical Israel, or actually the world at large of that day, it was an act of provision and restitution to the women and her family and a command of responsibility and restitution from the man. An unheralded arrangement of good in the near east of that day. Not to mention this would not have been the violence you are envisioning with beating and overwhelming force. When marrying the women of a vanquished foe, that was incredible mercy. They may have been raped and killed or left to starve by the gentile nations. The details are there like I’ve been telling you forever. The alternatives for a woman then were much worse. Yes, that is righteous and good.
[/quote]

Isn’t god eternal and unchanging though?

if so shouldn’t this act be considered a moral action today then too?

292

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Pat,

You have to admit that since there are so many versions of the bible out there, and so many interpretations of each bible by supposed “experts” that it makes it awfully easy to dismiss the non-literal interpretations out of hand. If 50 well read educated Christian folk have different understandings of the bible (based on intent and time period relevance)I would think that the literal version is the only way to go, unless you feel that picking and choosing the translations that best fits your own personal understanding of the bible and God is what suits you best.
[/quote]
There are many translations, only a couple of versions, when people see fit to subtract volumes from it.
I study from 3 different English translations and tend to favor the most literal possible. People’s different understandings don’t come from translation errors primarily, though it happens. It’s just flat a difficult book…Actually it’s not even a book it’s a collection 66 books (protestant) 71 (Catholic). There’s a lot going on, there is a lot of history, your dealing with a 4000 - 5000 year old culture and the intricacies that hence lie with in. Then you have command vs. context issues and it goes on and on.
It’s not a book for non-believers. As difficult as it can be, I couldn’t understand why a non-believer would even consider reading it. If God doesn’t exist, the bible is a complete waste of time.
For atheists to come and say they know shit about something they don’t know shit about, is absurd, disingenuous, ridiculous and flat stupid. People study the bible for years. Some people entire career and life work is to study the bible and not one of them is going to claim they know it all, or that they still don’t have a long way to go to understand all of it. It’s like saying you know calculus because you know addition. If you look in any calculus book, I garaun-fucking-tee you there is addition in there. That doesn’t actually mean I know shit about calculus.

[quote]
The only problem with that option though is that it makes you just as right and/or wrong as anyone else picking and choosing their favorites.
Of course if you go literally, bad shit is bound to happen since the bible isn’t the cuddliest of books.[/quote]

The bible is many things… And no, you cannot just go picking and choosing things to suit you. That’s how people get it to justify anything and everything. That’s not how it works. Time period, purpose, audience, and context are all paramount to understanding. And just becuase there are lots of difficult things to understand and gain understanding about, doesn’t mean all options are on the table. There are things that are clear and then there are deeper meanings. There are many layers.

293

[quote]therajraj wrote:
So are graven images an abomination of god or not?

Last I checked the Vatican has a lot of’em.

[/quote]

Are they worshiped as a god?

294

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:<<< But seriously, what’s your thoughts on what Deuteronomy instructing a girl to marry her rapist?[/quote]In the context of Levitical Israel, or actually the world at large of that day, it was an act of provision and restitution to the women and her family and a command of responsibility and restitution from the man. An unheralded arrangement of good in the near east of that day. Not to mention this would not have been the violence you are envisioning with beating and overwhelming force. When marrying the women of a vanquished foe, that was incredible mercy. They may have been raped and killed or left to starve by the gentile nations. The details are there like I’ve been telling you forever. The alternatives for a woman then were much worse. Yes, that is righteous and good.
[/quote]

Isn’t god eternal and unchanging though?

if so shouldn’t this act be considered a moral action today then too?[/quote]

This is just painful…

295

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
So are graven images an abomination of god or not?

Last I checked the Vatican has a lot of’em.

[/quote]

Are they worshiped as a god?[/quote]

I don’t know, you tell me. I do know that this commandment is not in the catholic 10 commandments

296

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

In reality your wrong. Besides you just made an argument for atheism to be a religion. If atheism isn’t a religion then how can you convert?[/quote]

Where in my post did I write convert?

If you deconvert from a religion and do not adopt a new one, then you are an atheist.
[/quote]
No you are not. You’re just not practicing that religion anymore. And there is no evidence of a mass deconversion. That ended with the fall of the USSR, where they killed you for being religious.

You must not have looked to hard. Sorry everything you have ever stated, everything link you have posted anything is in the search for not believing. Are you perusing atheist websites for reasons to believe? Yet you seem to buy the propaganda hook line and sinker… Your 5 senses cannot tell you everything.

It is a silly fiction, it requires belief in something from nothing. It requires belief in randomness. They way dumber that believing in virgin birth, or transubstantiation. How do you know it didn’t happen? Where you there? Is everybody in history who had a miraculous experience a liar, or a complete idiot? You say you want this ‘Paul’ experience, that you want some miracle to happen to you. What are you prepared to do if it happened? What are you prepared to do to get it? Can you be ‘all in’?

297

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:<<< But seriously, what’s your thoughts on what Deuteronomy instructing a girl to marry her rapist?[/quote]In the context of Levitical Israel, or actually the world at large of that day, it was an act of provision and restitution to the women and her family and a command of responsibility and restitution from the man. An unheralded arrangement of good in the near east of that day. Not to mention this would not have been the violence you are envisioning with beating and overwhelming force. When marrying the women of a vanquished foe, that was incredible mercy. They may have been raped and killed or left to starve by the gentile nations. The details are there like I’ve been telling you forever. The alternatives for a woman then were much worse. Yes, that is righteous and good.
[/quote]

You both incorrect.

The passage does not deal with forcible rape and does not command the woman to marry the man.

I will address in the Judaism thread.

298

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:<<< But seriously, what’s your thoughts on what Deuteronomy instructing a girl to marry her rapist?[/quote]In the context of Levitical Israel, or actually the world at large of that day, it was an act of provision and restitution to the women and her family and a command of responsibility and restitution from the man. An unheralded arrangement of good in the near east of that day. Not to mention this would not have been the violence you are envisioning with beating and overwhelming force. When marrying the women of a vanquished foe, that was incredible mercy. They may have been raped and killed or left to starve by the gentile nations. The details are there like I’ve been telling you forever. The alternatives for a woman then were much worse. Yes, that is righteous and good.
[/quote]

You both incorrect.

The passage does not deal with forcible rape and does not command the woman to marry the man.

I will address in the Judaism thread.[/quote]
There is nothing in that passage that indicates rape was done, rape was punished with death. Jewbacca isn’t Exodus 22:16-17 the backdrop for this passage?

299

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:<<< But seriously, what’s your thoughts on what Deuteronomy instructing a girl to marry her rapist?[/quote]In the context of Levitical Israel, or actually the world at large of that day, it was an act of provision and restitution to the women and her family and a command of responsibility and restitution from the man. An unheralded arrangement of good in the near east of that day. Not to mention this would not have been the violence you are envisioning with beating and overwhelming force. When marrying the women of a vanquished foe, that was incredible mercy. They may have been raped and killed or left to starve by the gentile nations. The details are there like I’ve been telling you forever. The alternatives for a woman then were much worse. Yes, that is righteous and good.
[/quote]

You both incorrect.

The passage does not deal with forcible rape and does not command the woman to marry the man.

I will address in the Judaism thread.[/quote]

Jewbacca, I think atheists who never read the scriptures know them better than you do…Geez

300

[quote]pat wrote:
No you are not. You’re just not practicing that religion anymore. And there is no evidence of a mass deconversion. That ended with the fall of the USSR, where they killed you for being religious.
[/quote]

If you no longer believe in god, you are an atheist.

I’m not saying mass deconversions are occurring. I am saying that when people switch between theism and atheism, they generally switch FROM theism TO atheism. This girl is nothing but an aberration.

[quote]pat wrote:

You must not have looked to hard. Sorry everything you have ever stated, everything link you have posted anything is in the search for not believing. Are you perusing atheist websites for reasons to believe? Yet you seem to buy the propaganda hook line and sinker… Your 5 senses cannot tell you everything.[/quote]

How about this. I researched the topic and came to a different conclusion than you. Strange huh?

[quote]pat wrote:

It is a silly fiction, it requires belief in something from nothing. [/quote]

That’s not my position. My position is that I do not necessarily accept something cannot come from nothing.

[quote]pat wrote:

It requires belief in randomness. They way dumber that believing in virgin birth, or transubstantiation. How do you know it didn’t happen? Where you there?[/quote]

Really? That’s your reply? That I wasn’t there so how could I know it didn’t happen? Are you being facetious?

[quote]pat wrote:

Is everybody in history who had a miraculous experience a liar, or a complete idiot? [/quote]

Some are for sure. I would say most events are just unexplained and it would bewrong to jump to the conclusion the event was supernatural in nature without evidence.

[quote]pat wrote:

You say you want this ‘Paul’ experience, that you want some miracle to happen to you. What are you prepared to do if it happened? What are you prepared to do to get it? Can you be ‘all in’? [/quote]

Sure would.